![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
acroyearFrom Reuters:
Ok, so because on air television is so bad, we're going to further regulate cable.
Not counting the fact that 1) parents DO have the ability to restrict which channels can be watched, 2) parents DO already decide whether or not to have pay channels, and 3) parents can password protect pay-per-view as well. Finally, cable companies are mostly local (and satallite systems have local-aware capabilities) so they can already black-out content deemed inappropriate for the community obscenity standards (indecency is another issue, and is PROTECTED SPEECH YOU JACKASSES so KNOCK IT OFF). They use the same technology to enforce sports-related blackouts.
Its already all in there...and in addition, most digital set-top boxes are already V-Chip aware, so even if your TV doesn't have the V-Chip, the cable box can handle it for you.
Cable customers already know and have control over what they are and aren't getting, and the ultimate solution (ditch the cable) is always an option. On air broadcasts are the things out of people's control and solely in the hands of the networks and affiliates.
Besides, isn't McCain supposed to be solving our Intelligence crisis yet? Or is he part of the problem to begin with?
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Outraged by how salacious programs on radio and network television have become in recent months, lawmakers vowed on Wednesday to look at indecent shows on cable and satellite channels.
Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John McCain urged cable and satellite companies to offer parents the ability to pick and choose what channels they get so they can protect their children from violence, sex and profanity, an idea that resonated with other lawmakers and regulators.
Ok, so because on air television is so bad, we're going to further regulate cable.
Not counting the fact that 1) parents DO have the ability to restrict which channels can be watched, 2) parents DO already decide whether or not to have pay channels, and 3) parents can password protect pay-per-view as well. Finally, cable companies are mostly local (and satallite systems have local-aware capabilities) so they can already black-out content deemed inappropriate for the community obscenity standards (indecency is another issue, and is PROTECTED SPEECH YOU JACKASSES so KNOCK IT OFF). They use the same technology to enforce sports-related blackouts.
Its already all in there...and in addition, most digital set-top boxes are already V-Chip aware, so even if your TV doesn't have the V-Chip, the cable box can handle it for you.
Cable customers already know and have control over what they are and aren't getting, and the ultimate solution (ditch the cable) is always an option. On air broadcasts are the things out of people's control and solely in the hands of the networks and affiliates.
Besides, isn't McCain supposed to be solving our Intelligence crisis yet? Or is he part of the problem to begin with?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-02-11 11:35 am (UTC)*rolls eyes*
next they will be telling us how to be "appropiate parents" oh wait....we have that already too. Social Services.
Thus, the Newt Gingrinch fear...
Date: 2004-02-11 11:47 am (UTC)the result being, of course, that anybody still married to their first wives will have to divorce them immediately, because about 60-70% of the Family Values crowd of the 90s, including Reagon, Dole, and Newt, were all on their 2nd marriage.
this is the "sanctity" of marriage?
Re: Thus, the Newt Gingrinch fear...
Date: 2004-02-11 12:10 pm (UTC)I'm sorry, but the sanctity of marriage is a practical joke, in my humble opinion. You get it played on you by smug married's and then you play it on some naive non-married's so that they become the victim and they (being the newly created
undeadsmug married's) in turn play it one someone else...